Sunday, September 18, 2016

Considering how many
people are reporting about the election, news organizations are faced with a
daunting challenge. How do you find a different angle? How do you show
the election in a different light?

For today the award for originality goes to the New York Times. Of course, the Times has been staunchly and resolutely in the Clinton
corner. Not only on its editorial page, but in its presentation of the news.

Today, the Times has outdone itself, in a slightly
unexpected way. It sent some reporters out to take the pulse of the New York
City electorate, especially Hillary’s supporters. Their story offers an
excellent picture of the local reaction to the recent Clinton meltdown and the
concomitant Trump surge.

How do good Clinton supporters react to this unexpected and
highly unwelcome shift? According to the Times, they do what they always do.
They wet their beds.

I didn’t say it. The Times did:

For
both parties, every election can feel like the most vital of a lifetime, the
one day standing between a still-proud nation and its imminent demise. Among
liberals, there is an especially rich tradition of “bed-wetting,” as even some
practitioners call it, at the faintest sign of shakiness from their candidate.

Everyone from Barack Obama on down has assured us
that Hillary is the most qualified presidential candidate in American history.
You and I know that using mindless hyperbole can only mean that Hillary is inept
and incompetent.

Anyone who bought the first story is more than shocked at the
realization that the ever-competent Hillary does not know how to run a
campaign. Even with Bubba at her side, she looks to be blowing it… and not in
the good sense of the word.

The Times reports:

But as Hillary Clinton lurches
toward Election Day, her supporters at times seem overwhelmed by a tsunami of
unease, exacerbated by Mrs.
Clinton’s bout of pneumonia and a slow-footed acknowledgment of the
illness. They are confronting a question they had assumed, just a few weeks
ago, they would not need to consider in a race against the most unpopular
presidential nominee in modern times: Could Mrs. Clinton actually blow this?

“… a tsunami of unease…” That sounds like a very serious
problem, one that you are not going to stop by ordering it to stop. When
you are faced with a tsunami, you do best to evacuate the area. Right away.

Apparently, Times writers are not very adept at metaphor.
The tsunami of unease becomes a “creeping dread.” Evidently, the creeping dread
is more manageable than any tsunami. Tsunamis do not creep. Creeps might creep, but tsunamis don't.

The
creeping dread has accelerated in recent days, reaching critical levels even by
Democratic standards.

Mrs.
Clinton became sick. Several polls tightened to the margin of panic, with Mr.
Trump overtaking her in surveys in Ohio and Florida. And even as Democrats
hoped on Friday that Mr.
Trump’s latest gambit — seeking to distance himself from his long
history of “birtherism” — would backfire, there is a fear that no scandal can
sink him.

A
cartoon in The New Yorker captured it best: A woman sits in her
psychiatrist’s office, perspiring in distress. The doctor scribbles on a pad.
“I’m giving you something for Hillary’s pneumonia,” the caption reads.

Some Hillary supporters are so upset that they have taken to
blaming the candidate herself. They might have asked themselves why they had
believed that this manifestly incompetent government official would be a great
candidate, but that will be for another day.

The Times continues:

But
even some zealous Clinton defenders have grown frustrated with their candidate,
marveling at the prospect of her snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, for
which some say they would never forgive her. The campaign’s decision last week
not to acknowledge Mrs. Clinton’s pneumonia until two days after a diagnosis,
once video surfaced of her stumbling out of a Sept. 11 memorial service on
Sunday, has especially rankled.

And yet, some still hold out hope for a great debate
performance… as long as Hillary does not have a coughing fit. Recently, she has been hard at work mastering the art of hiding her coughing fits.

Some
optimists have preached calm, reminding one another of Mrs. Clinton’s
organizational advantages and holding out hope that she can best Mr. Trump
decisively on a debate stage.

To my mind, the best part is this. Those Hillary
supporters who cannot bring themselves to blame the candidate have taken to…
blaming the media.

If only the media had not been reporting on the race, if
only the media had not been in the tank for Donald Trump, if only… if only.
Notable fanatic Gloria Steinem is totally upset because the media has been ... evenhanded.
Can she be thinking of the New York Times? For her self-esteem, we hope against
hope that it isn’t so.

The Times concludes:

While
allowing that Mrs. Clinton has not run a perfect race, many of her admirers
have cast blame elsewhere, singling out the news media, the Republicans who
nominated Mr. Trump and, of course, the man himself.

Gloria
Steinem, the feminist leader and a Clinton supporter, said in an email that she
had sensed a growing worry in recent weeks, fearing that Mr. Trump’s candidacy
was becoming “legitimized by ‘media evenhandedness’” that had made his assorted
scandals seem more banal.

NOTE: Polifacts now states there is no proof that Hillary started the birther movement which would make sense considering how the Clintons are very careful to have plausible deniability and use surrogates to do the "dirty work" of politics. They are not unknown to have throw people "under the bus." I wish I understood the desire to fall upon somebody else sword, but I don't. Call me naive?

I am always amazed at the Liberal Bedwetters, who have little contact with people outside "blue areas," are surprised when things are not what they think they are. One cannot think ill of large areas, flyover country, rubes, deplorables, irredeemables, et al, of this country and not see the results. As one NY leftist stated, I don't know anyone who voted for..............

No matter how this turns out it is going to be fun to watch given that the election is basically between Trump and the "media." Hillary is just the pretender behind the screen appearing once in a while just to ensure we know she is alive and Trump is responsible for every ill that affects this country. At least the NYTimes could try to be honest and change their name to the "NY Democrat."

I'm not surprised that Steinem believes that the media, when actually reporting facts rather than opinions, is too evenhanded -- after all, Dan Rather, as reported by Bernie Goldberg, believes that the New York Times is "middle of the road" -- nearly every news story in the last few weeks (accelerating a trend?) has convinced me that The Onion is going to have to close shop soon: they can't parody reality anymore, because reality is becoming unbelievable.